alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.2**
**Certification**
I, Timothy R. Yost, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of The Corporate Executive Board Company; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly presentin all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:   (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;   (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and   (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):   (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and   (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Date: November 5, 2004
/s/ Timothy R. YostTimothy R. YostChief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 135 (Wednesday, July 15, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 38167]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18812]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket Nos. RP97-346-000, TM97-3-24-000, and RP98-123-000]


Equitrans, L.P.; Notice of Informal Settlement Conference

July 9, 1998.
    Take notice that an informal settlement conference will be convened 
in this proceeding on Wednesday, July 15, 1998, at 10:00 a.m., and will 
continue on Thursday, July 16, 1998, at the offices of the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, DC, 
20426, for the purpose of reviewing the draft settlement documents in 
the above-referenced dockets.
    Any party, as defined by 18 CFR 385.102(c), or any participant, as 
defined by 18 CFR 385.102(b), is invited to attend. Persons wishing to 
become a party must move to intervene and receive intervenor status 
pursuant to the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 385.214).
    For additional information, please contact Irene E. Szopo at (202) 
208-1602 or Robert A. Young at (202) 208-5705.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18812 Filed 7-14-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF NET INCOME INCLUDED IN
THE REGISTRANT'S FORM 10-QSB FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JULY 31, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1999
<CASH>                                         682,654
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,476,876
<ALLOWANCES>                                    89,367
<INVENTORY>                                  5,531,033
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            13,976,284
<PP&E>                                      10,520,164
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,749,290
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              21,774,458
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        9,092,839
<BONDS>                                      3,299,776
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     6,867,529
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,514,314
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                21,774,458
<SALES>                                     14,282,994
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            14,282,994
<CGS>                                        9,797,322
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               12,849,816
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             173,763
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,259,415
<INCOME-TAX>                                   405,532
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   853,883
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.31


</TABLE>
No. 10-10422.

#### Ohifuemeh Peter Ayewoh, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 836, 132 S. Ct. 141,

181 L. Ed. 2d 60,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5697.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied.

Same case below, 627 F.3d 914.
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION****906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002**

In connection with the quarterly report of JanusCapital Group Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30,2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, Gregory A. Frost, Senior Vice President and Chief FinancialOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)                       The reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)                       The informationcontained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| /s/ Gregory A. Frost                                |   |
|-----------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Gregory A. Frost                                    |   |
| Senior Vice  President and  Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

Date: July 30, 2007

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Janus CapitalGroup Inc. and will be retained by Janus Capital Group Inc. and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
1 U.S.	Department	of	Transportation Docket	Management	System 1200	New	Jersey	Ave.,	SE Washington	DC	20590

RE:	Exemption	Request	Pursuant	To	Section	333	of	the	FAA	Reform	Act
of	 2012 and Part	 11	 of	 the	 Federal	 Aviation	 Regulations	 from	 Certain
Provisions	of 14	C.F.R.

To	Whom	It	May	Concern:

I	am	writing	pursuant	to	the	FAA	Modernization	and	Reform	Act of	2012	(the	“Reform	Act”)	and	14	C.F.R.	Part	11,	Z

- Drones	LLC ,	seeks	an exemption	from	Federa l	Aviation	Regulations	(“FARs”)	listed	in Appendices	A	and	B	to	a llow	commercial	operation	of	its	UAs,	so	long	as such	operations	are	conducted	within	and	under	the	conditions	outlined herein	or	as	may	be	established	by	the	FAA	in	a	grant	of	this	petition. This	request	is	substantially	similar	to	other	data	collection	p etitions previously	approved	and	should	be	considered	under	the	expedited summary	grant	procedure.	Additionally,	this	petition	should	be	eligible for	the	summary	grant	because	of	the	voluntary	altitude	restriction	to 200	feet	above	ground	level	(AGL).

Ap proval	of	the	exemption	for	Z

- Drones	will	allow	commercial operation	of	the	DJI	Inspire	1	and	DJI	Spreading	Wings	S1000	for	real estate	photography	and	videography	in	Class	G	airspace	nationwide,	or as	otherwise	prescribed	by	an	Air	Traffic	Organization	(A TO)	issued COA.	The	UAs	covered	by	this	petition are battery

- powered	craft s, weighing	approximately 6	lbs	and	24	lbs,	inclusive	of	battery	and payload.	Operation	of	the	UAs	under	the	strict	conditions	proposed below	will	provide	an	equivalent	level	of	safe ty,	as	Congress	intended, while	still	allowing	commercial	operations.	Operations	using	these	UAs are	far	safer	than	conventional	operations	conducted	with	helicopters
and	fixed

- wing	aircraft	that	weigh	thousands	of	pounds,	carry	highly flammable	fuel,	and operate	in	close	proximity	to	the	ground,	trees, infrastructure,	and	people.

Congress	directed	the	FAA	to	consider	seven	factors	in	deciding whether	to	approve	Section	333	exemption	petitions

- size,	weight,2 speed,	operational	capability,	proximity	to	air ports,	proximity	to populated	areas,	and	operation	within	visual	line	of	sight.	In	this	case, each	factor	supports	the	exemption	request.	In	particular,	the	UA	is small,	and	will	operate	at	slow	s peeds	and	close	to	the	ground.	Thus,	i t will	be	able	to oper ate safely	and	efficiently	take	aerial	photography	and videography.	The	substantial	increase	of	safety	and	decrease	of	risk	to human	life	and	property	weighs	heavily	in	favor	of	granting	the exemption.

I	am	prepared	and	willing	to	modify	or	amend	any part	of	this request	to satisfy	the	need	for	an	equivalent	level	of	safety.	I	look	forward	to hearing	back.	Please	contact	me	at	any	time	on	my	direct	phone	line	at (630)

- 707

- 4598	for	additional	information	or	clarification

Sincerely, 

# Jeff Zita

Jeffrey	M. Zita

Owner	&	Operator,	Z

- Drones	LLC
No. 10-10620.

#### Ledwin Castro, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 841, 132 S. Ct. 153,

181 L. Ed. 2d 69,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6490.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.

Same case below, 411 Fed. Appx. 415.
YOU ARE NOT 

ALONE

Mental health conditions do not discriminate 

based on race, color, gender or identity.

July is Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC) 

Mental Health Awareness Month

B-P1157E (5/23) ©2023 Magellan Health, Inc.

Help is available. Your Employee Assistance Program is completely confidential

and available 24/7/365. Give us a call at 1-866-580-9046 (TTY 711) or visit

MagellanAscend.com to get started.
No. 10-1262.

#### China Terminal & Electric Corp., et al., Petitioners v. Jeffrey Willemsen, Personal Representative of the Estate of Karlene J. Willemsen, et al.

565 U.S. 802, 132 S. Ct. 75,

181 L. Ed. 2d 1,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6804.

October 3, 2011.

On petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Oregon. Petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the Supreme Court of Oregon for further consideration in light of J. McIntyre Mach., Ltd. v. Nicastro, 564 U.S. 873, 131 S. Ct. 2780, 180 L. Ed. 2d 765 (2011).
JULIE CREWS, Wife,

Appellant,

v.

BRYAN A. CREWS, Husband,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-0083

_____________________________/

Opinion filed August 5, 2014.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Nassau County.

Robert M. Foster, Judge.

Julie Crews, pro se, Appellant.

Bryan A. Crews, pro se, Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

LEWIS, C.J., BENTON, and MARSTILLER, JJ., CONCUR.
Exhibit 10.26
 
  
 Re:
    
    Offer of Employment
   Period of Employment
 Position, Duties and Responsibilities.
 .




---



##### 



Compensation
     Termination
  -2-




---



##### 



-3-




---



##### 



Confidential Information
 Additional Obligations
 Notice
 If to you
 
 -4-




---



##### 



If to the Company
 
 With a copy to
 
  Entire Agreement
 Amendment
 No Waiver
 Assignment
 -5-




---



##### 



Interpretation and Severability
 Governing Law
 Execution
 Survival
 Headings
   EMERSON RADIO CORP
 By:
    
    /s/ Greenfield Pitts
Greenfield Pitts
Chief Financial Officer
 Offer Of Employment Accepted:
 /s/ John Spielberger
    
    October 15, 2007John Spielberger
    
    Date
 -6-
**CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**
  **AND
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**
  **PURSUANT
TO**
  **18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**
  **AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**
  **SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
  
  The
undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to, and as required by, 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
the Annual Report of DCAP Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the
year ended December 31, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that
information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.
  
 Dated:
March 30, 2005
 
 
 /s/ Barry B. Goldstein
 Barry B.
Goldstein
 Chief
Executive Officer and
 Chief
Financial Officer
#### Harold L. MOCK, Petitioner-Appellant, v. The UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 15395.

United States Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit.

March 31, 1964.

*497Paul R. Moran (Court appointed), Cincinnati, Ohio, for appellant, Harold L. Mock, in pro. per., on the brief.

Geraldine B. Ford, Asst. U. S. Atty., Detroit, Mich., for appellee, Lawrence Gubow, U. S. Atty., Detroit, Mich., on the brief.

Before WEICK, Chief Judge, and O’SULLIVAN and EDWARDS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant sought vacation of a 20-year sentence for bank robbery, under Title 28 U.S.C. § 2255, on grounds of insanity. The District Judge without hearing denied the motion on the basis of the files and records.

The records referred to included transcripts of the hearing on arraignment and the hearing on sentence. At the latter appellant was represented by experienced counsel. The District Judge conducted a careful examination of appellant and his counsel as to the truth and voluntary character of the plea of guilty.

The transcript of this hearing also indicates, however, that appellant asserted pertaining to the robbery, “I know at the time I did it I was sick,” and that he asked for “medical help,” and “psychiatric treatment.”

On appeal this court appointed counsel for appellant who argued his appeal.

On hearing counsel for appellant relied principally on his claim of insanity at the time of commission of the crime, and when he pleaded guilty thereto.

Prior to a recent interpretation of § 2255 procedures by the United States Supreme Court in Sanders v. United States, 373 U.S. 1, 83 S.Ct. 1068, 10 L.Ed.2d 148 (1963), this court, on the facts in the instant case, would have affirmed without prejudice to appellant filing an application for a sanity examination under Title 18 U.S.C. § 4245, and subsequently renewing the motion to vacate sentence. Davis v. United States, 270 F.2d 177 (C.A.6 1959); Hoskins v. United States, 251 F.2d 51 (C.A.6 1957).

We now read Sanders, supra, (which was decided after the District Judge denied this motion) as suggesting that “any appropriate means for inquiry into the legality of the prisoner’s detention” (Sanders, supra373 U.S. at 22, 83 S.Ct. 1081, 10 L.Ed.2d 148) be employed at the first motion brought under § 2255, unless the files and records “conclusively show” that petitioner is entitled to no relief.

What is obviously missing from this record is the result of a § 4245 examination.1 In order to procure such examination, we remand the case to the Dis*498trict Court for further proceedings. The District Attorney (as an officer of the court) should initiate the § 4245 examination.

The order denying motion to vacate .sentence is vacated and the case is remanded.

1

. In his order denying the instant motion, the District Judge referred to an examination of appellant in prison where “no indication of mental disease was found, but simply a propensity to fabricate.” Counsel for the government, on inquiry from this court as to the nature of the prison examination referred to by the District Judge, stated that this was the routine medical examination given on admission.
Exhibit
31.1
  Certification
of Chief Executive Officer
 Pursuant
to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  
 I, Robert
M. Callahan, Chief Executive Officer, certify that:
 
 1.    I
have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Metwood, Inc. and subsidiary
(the “Company”).
 
 2.    Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statement made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading
with respect to the period covered by this report;
 
 3.    Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects, the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for,
the periods presented in this report;
 
 4.    The
Company’s other certifying officer(s) and I am responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15d-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Company and have:
 
 (a)    Designed
such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the Company, including its consolidates subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period
in which this report is being prepared;
 
 (b)    Evaluated
the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures, and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and
 
 (c)    Disclosed
in this report any change in the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the Company’s fourth fiscal quarter that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s
internal control over financial reporting; and
 
 5.    The
Company’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company’s
auditors and the audit committee of Company’s board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):
 
 (a)    All
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the Company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial information; and
 
 (b)    Any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting.
  Date: October
      14, 2008
              By:
              /s/ Robert
      M. CallahanRobert
      M. Callahan
                Chief
      Executive Officer
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

NATHAN WINSTON BUNDY,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 70 EAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 2nd day of August, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
```
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 135 (Wednesday, July 15, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 38174]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18755]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

Notice of Agreement(s) Filed

    The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following 
agreement(s) under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties can 
review or obtain copies of agreements at the Washington, DC offices of 
the Commission, 800 North Capitol Street, N.W., Room 962. Interested 
parties may submit comments on an agreement to the Secretary, Federal 
Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573, within 10 days of the date 
this notice appears in the Federal Register.

Agreement No.: 203-011325-016
Title: Westbound Transpacific Stabilization Agreement
Parites:
    A.P. Moller-Maersk Line
    American President Lines, Ltd.
    China Ocean Shipping Company, Inc.
    Hapag-Lloyd Container Line GmbH
    Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd.
    Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Ltd.
    Nippon Yusen Kaisha Line
    Orient Overseas Container Line, Inc.
    P&O Nedlloyd Limited
    P&O Nedlloyd B.V.
    Sea-Land Service, Inc.
    Evergreen Marine Corporation, Ltd.
    Hanjin Shipping Co., Ltd.
    Hyundai Merchant Marine Co., Ltd.
    Transpacific Westbound Rate Agreement
Synopsis: The proposed amendment (1) clarifies operating procedures 
regarding the adoption of policy or rate guidelines, (2) shifts the 
Agreement's communications functions and responsibilities to the 
Agreement's Secretariat and Managing Director, and (3) corrects the 
title of the Chief Executive Officer of the Agreement.

Agreement No.: 203-011479-005
Title: Serpac Service Agreement
Parties:
    Compania Sudamericana de Varpores S.A.
    Transportation Maritima Grancolombiana S.A.
    Columbus Line
Synopis: The proposed modification revises the Agreement to include 
intermodal authority in both the U.S. and foreign portions of the 
geographic scope.

Agreement No.: 201-201020-002
Title: Jacksonville-Jaxport Refrigerated Services Terminal Lease 
Agreement
Parties:
    Jacksonville Port Authority
    Jaxport Refrigerated Services, Inc.
Synopsis: The proposed amendment amends the provision for wharfage and 
the Minimum Annual Guarantee. The amendment also includes a provision 
for a crane rental. The agreement continues to run through March 9, 
2017.

    Dated: July 9, 1998.

    By Order of the Federal Maritime Commission.
Joseph C. Polking,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18755 Filed 7-14-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-M
```